But for you and your ilk, it will always be simply about the oil price collapse and never about any possible negative consequences of the oil industry nationalization. Beyond what I mentioned, there are obviously other negative aspects to nationalization.

You love to keep moving the goalposts and changing the subject. You asked why Denmark wouldn't become Venezuela, and I pointed out two major differences between the two countries. But if you want to bring it up, Denmark doesn't have the same nationalized industries that Venezuela had, so that's another difference.

You won't get any argument from me that Venezuela has been stupidly run into the ground, but that doesn't mean that other countries who attempt some of the similar reforms (and in a democratic and not an autocratic manner as Chavez did, a fourth difference between the two countries) will wind up like Venezuela.

Ah. Her high profile is due to right wing emphasis, like right wing 60 Minutes?

60 Minutes responded to all the fuss that the Republicans have made about her from the day she was nominated. Democrats have focused on their leadership and what they plan to accomplish. I do follow left wing sites and I found very little mention of her after the novelty of her nomination died down in a few days. The only mentions were usually in response to Republican slams and slurs.

Ah. Her high profile is due to right wing emphasis, like right wing 60 Minutes?

60 Minutes responded to all the fuss that the Republicans have made about her from the day she was nominated. Democrats have focused on their leadership and what they plan to accomplish. I do follow left wing sites and I found very little mention of her after the novelty of her nomination died down in a few days. The only mentions were usually in response to Republican slams and slurs.

But for you and your ilk, it will always be simply about the oil price collapse and never about any possible negative consequences of the oil industry nationalization. Beyond what I mentioned, there are obviously other negative aspects to nationalization.

You love to keep moving the goalposts and changing the subject.

Cough, cough choke choke-takes one to know one I guess.

I will come back to what you said and I erased later-there were other countries that followed Chavez somewhat and they might be worth looking at. Ecuador and Bolivia, I think.

However, I am not going to let you off that easy on you simply attributing the problems to oil price collapse when their daily production collapsed from 3,000,000 barrels a day in 2011 to 1,000,000 barrels in 2018.

<<<"GlobalData also forecast that Venezuelan crude oil production would fall to around one million barrels per day by the end of 2018. This is a steep decline from the three million barrels per day that Venezuela produced in 2011.<<<

Then to move the goalposts again and ask a question I asked earlier.

Why, with no evidence, do you assume that "Denmark" is scalable beyond a Wisconsin sized entity?

These are goals, with many details to be worked out. But, rather than engage in a serious discussion of whether some or all of these goals are achievable (many of which have been achieved in Western economies considerably bigger than Denmark) and how we can go about them, Republicans put an arbitrary price tag on the whole package, claim that AOC is some sort of radical socialist, and start saying we'll become another Venezuela.

The question isn't whether the US can become another Denmark (although the business climate in Denmark is actually better than in the United States), but how to work towards as many of these goals as possible, goals which are quite popular with that segment of the American public that isn't obsessed with building a border wall.

Here's what Paul Krugman has to say about her proposals re top marginal rates.

To summarize, when US tax policy was in line with her proposals, we enjoyed the greatest and most widespread economic expansion in our history. We have evidence (in the form of the historical record) that tax rates along the lines of what Ocasio-Cortez is proposing do not in fact induce the rich to stop earning money. They continue to earn money, but since more of their gains are paid in taxes and since there's a lot the government could be doing to improve our collective lives (free pre-school, for example), those extra revenues improve us as a whole.

And since the extra money the very rich are paying doesn't really affect their lifestyles very much (perhaps they can no longer afford that third yacht), we gain this improvement at very little cost in human terms. --Bob

While I have little interest in doing the tax rate thing. It has been done to death here and start your own thread if you want. I have been thinking about your "3rd Yacht" comment.

Thomas Sowell has a quote " “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

Given the vast, ostentatious wealth where you live, you must be living your life green with envy most of the time at the fancy mansions and the "3rd Yachts" and so forth and you want to take it away from them.

Here's what Paul Krugman has to say about her proposals re top marginal rates.

To summarize, when US tax policy was in line with her proposals, we enjoyed the greatest and most widespread economic expansion in our history. We have evidence (in the form of the historical record) that tax rates along the lines of what Ocasio-Cortez is proposing do not in fact induce the rich to stop earning money. They continue to earn money, but since more of their gains are paid in taxes and since there's a lot the government could be doing to improve our collective lives (free pre-school, for example), those extra revenues improve us as a whole.

And since the extra money the very rich are paying doesn't really affect their lifestyles very much (perhaps they can no longer afford that third yacht), we gain this improvement at very little cost in human terms. --Bob

While I have little interest in doing the tax rate thing. It has been done to death here and start your own thread if you want. I have been thinking about your "3rd Yacht" comment.

Thomas Sowell has a quote " “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

Given the vast, ostentatious wealth where you live, you must be living your life green with envy most of the time at the fancy mansions and the "3rd Yachts" and so forth and you want to take it away from them.

No. If you remember my first Jeopardy! interview, you'll know that I'm not particularly materialistic, and I'm certainly not one to envy what others have. What I want is a government that would rather spend $5 billion on child care than on a useless wall.

I don't mind paying more taxes to achieve my goals for the government. But I mind a lot paying more taxes in order to cut the taxes of billionaires. --Bob

_________________"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

Here's what Paul Krugman has to say about her proposals re top marginal rates.

To summarize, when US tax policy was in line with her proposals, we enjoyed the greatest and most widespread economic expansion in our history. We have evidence (in the form of the historical record) that tax rates along the lines of what Ocasio-Cortez is proposing do not in fact induce the rich to stop earning money. They continue to earn money, but since more of their gains are paid in taxes and since there's a lot the government could be doing to improve our collective lives (free pre-school, for example), those extra revenues improve us as a whole.

And since the extra money the very rich are paying doesn't really affect their lifestyles very much (perhaps they can no longer afford that third yacht), we gain this improvement at very little cost in human terms. --Bob

While I have little interest in doing the tax rate thing. It has been done to death here and start your own thread if you want. I have been thinking about your "3rd Yacht" comment.

Thomas Sowell has a quote " “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

Given the vast, ostentatious wealth where you live, you must be living your life green with envy most of the time at the fancy mansions and the "3rd Yachts" and so forth and you want to take it away from them.

No. If you remember my first Jeopardy! interview, you'll know that I'm not particularly materialistic, and I'm certainly not one to envy what others have. What I want is a government that would rather spend $5 billion on child care than on a useless wall.

I don't mind paying more taxes to achieve my goals for the government. But I mind a lot paying more taxes in order to cut the taxes of billionaires. --Bob

As of yesterday, Soybean price was $8.14 and it has been going up the last few weeks as harvest ended. This is probably within the range they would have been without the tariffs. There is no way they were going to stay at $9.50 as it was last spring given the big crop we had.

I assume that Bob#'s understands the difference between wealth and income, but you never can quite tell for sure, can you? It is obvious that any income tax, no matter how progressive, would catch very little of the "3rd Yacht" type of stuff. For that you would need a wealth tax.

It is a waste of time to talk about billionaires and "3rd Yachts" and so forth in the context of an income tax. You want to go after that money, fine. But you have to do it with a wealth tax.

Be that as it may, obviously Bob has set himself up as the "Commissar of Stuff" in that he gets to decide what people can own. We have established that they can't own 3 yachts.

Obviously, he has to define "Yacht" and "Yacht Equivalents."

Can somebody own 2 yachts, 2 top of the line speedboats and a decked-out deepwater fishing boat?

What is the upper limit on art collections? There has to be one. Does anybody really need more than 2 expensive paintings? All you can do is look at them anyway.

At least with yachts, there are jobs building, maintaining and running them. Artwork just sits there, so maybe people really only should have one nice piece of artwork.

While I have little interest in doing the tax rate thing. It has been done to death here and start your own thread if you want. I have been thinking about your "3rd Yacht" comment.

Thomas Sowell has a quote " “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

Given the vast, ostentatious wealth where you live, you must be living your life green with envy most of the time at the fancy mansions and the "3rd Yachts" and so forth and you want to take it away from them.

No. If you remember my first Jeopardy! interview, you'll know that I'm not particularly materialistic, and I'm certainly not one to envy what others have. What I want is a government that would rather spend $5 billion on child care than on a useless wall.

I don't mind paying more taxes to achieve my goals for the government. But I mind a lot paying more taxes in order to cut the taxes of billionaires. --Bob

As of yesterday, Soybean price was $8.14 and it has been going up the last few weeks as harvest ended. This is probably within the range they would have been without the tariffs. There is no way they were going to stay at $9.50 as it was last spring given the big crop we had.

I assume that Bob#'s understands the difference between wealth and income, but you never can quite tell for sure, can you? It is obvious that any income tax, no matter how progressive, would catch very little of the "3rd Yacht" type of stuff. For that you would need a wealth tax.

Be that as it may, obviously Bob has set himself up as the "Commissar of Stuff" in that he gets to decide what people can own. We have established that they can't own 3 yachts.

Obviously, he has to define "Yacht" and "Yacht Equivalents."

Can somebody own 2 yachts, 2 top of the line speedboats and a decked-out deepwater fishing boat?

What is the upper limit on art collections? There has to be one. Does anybody really need more than 2 expensive paintings? All you can do is look at them anyway.

At least with yachts, there are jobs building, maintaining and running them. Artwork just sits there, so maybe people really only should have one nice piece of artwork.

You don't understand. These restrictions create jobs. They'll need committees to determine all the consumption levels. Those committees need to be at least 10 peeps each.

Here's what Paul Krugman has to say about her proposals re top marginal rates.

To summarize, when US tax policy was in line with her proposals, we enjoyed the greatest and most widespread economic expansion in our history. We have evidence (in the form of the historical record) that tax rates along the lines of what Ocasio-Cortez is proposing do not in fact induce the rich to stop earning money. They continue to earn money, but since more of their gains are paid in taxes and since there's a lot the government could be doing to improve our collective lives (free pre-school, for example), those extra revenues improve us as a whole.

And since the extra money the very rich are paying doesn't really affect their lifestyles very much (perhaps they can no longer afford that third yacht), we gain this improvement at very little cost in human terms. --Bob

While I have little interest in doing the tax rate thing. It has been done to death here and start your own thread if you want. I have been thinking about your "3rd Yacht" comment.

Thomas Sowell has a quote " “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

Given the vast, ostentatious wealth where you live, you must be living your life green with envy most of the time at the fancy mansions and the "3rd Yachts" and so forth and you want to take it away from them.

No. If you remember my first Jeopardy! interview, you'll know that I'm not particularly materialistic, and I'm certainly not one to envy what others have. What I want is a government that would rather spend $5 billion on child care than on a useless wall.

I don't mind paying more taxes to achieve my goals for the government. But I mind a lot paying more taxes in order to cut the taxes of billionaires. --Bob

Just an anecdote, bob-tel, but how much more are you willing to pay for something before you question how much the government is using to achieve YOUR goals, and how much they're using to achieve THEIRS?

I DO mind paying more taxes to the government. Because they WASTE it. How's your high speed rail project going?

No. If you remember my first Jeopardy! interview, you'll know that I'm not particularly materialistic, and I'm certainly not one to envy what others have. What I want is a government that would rather spend $5 billion on child care than on a useless wall.

I don't mind paying more taxes to achieve my goals for the government. But I mind a lot paying more taxes in order to cut the taxes of billionaires. --Bob

As of yesterday, Soybean price was $8.14 and it has been going up the last few weeks as harvest ended. This is probably within the range they would have been without the tariffs. There is no way they were going to stay at $9.50 as it was last spring given the big crop we had.

I assume that Bob#'s understands the difference between wealth and income, but you never can quite tell for sure, can you? It is obvious that any income tax, no matter how progressive, would catch very little of the "3rd Yacht" type of stuff. For that you would need a wealth tax.

Be that as it may, obviously Bob has set himself up as the "Commissar of Stuff" in that he gets to decide what people can own. We have established that they can't own 3 yachts.

Obviously, he has to define "Yacht" and "Yacht Equivalents."

Can somebody own 2 yachts, 2 top of the line speedboats and a decked-out deepwater fishing boat?

What is the upper limit on art collections? There has to be one. Does anybody really need more than 2 expensive paintings? All you can do is look at them anyway.

At least with yachts, there are jobs building, maintaining and running them. Artwork just sits there, so maybe people really only should have one nice piece of artwork.

You don't understand. These restrictions create jobs. They'll need committees to determine all the consumption levels. Those committees need to be at least 10 peeps each.

While I have little interest in doing the tax rate thing. It has been done to death here and start your own thread if you want. I have been thinking about your "3rd Yacht" comment.

Thomas Sowell has a quote " “I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

Given the vast, ostentatious wealth where you live, you must be living your life green with envy most of the time at the fancy mansions and the "3rd Yachts" and so forth and you want to take it away from them.

No. If you remember my first Jeopardy! interview, you'll know that I'm not particularly materialistic, and I'm certainly not one to envy what others have. What I want is a government that would rather spend $5 billion on child care than on a useless wall.

I don't mind paying more taxes to achieve my goals for the government. But I mind a lot paying more taxes in order to cut the taxes of billionaires. --Bob

Just an anecdote, bob-tel, but how much more are you willing to pay for something before you question how much the government is using to achieve YOUR goals, and how much they're using to achieve THEIRS?

I DO mind paying more taxes to the government. Because they WASTE it. How's your high speed rail project going?

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

I moved to California a little more than 40 years ago. Back then, during the summer, there were plenty of days when my eyes were burning simply from exposure to all of the crap that used to be in our air. That doesn't happen any more. I'll cheerfully pay the extra buck and a half a gallon to avoid the air pollution of Shanghai and Mexico City. Particularly since my son and his mother both have asthma. --Bob

_________________"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

No. If you remember my first Jeopardy! interview, you'll know that I'm not particularly materialistic, and I'm certainly not one to envy what others have. What I want is a government that would rather spend $5 billion on child care than on a useless wall.

I don't mind paying more taxes to achieve my goals for the government. But I mind a lot paying more taxes in order to cut the taxes of billionaires. --Bob

Just an anecdote, bob-tel, but how much more are you willing to pay for something before you question how much the government is using to achieve YOUR goals, and how much they're using to achieve THEIRS?

I DO mind paying more taxes to the government. Because they WASTE it. How's your high speed rail project going?

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

I moved to California a little more than 40 years ago. Back then, during the summer, there were plenty of days when my eyes were burning simply from exposure to all of the crap that used to be in our air. That doesn't happen any more. I'll cheerfully pay the extra buck and a half a gallon to avoid the air pollution of Shanghai and Mexico City. Particularly since my son and his mother both have asthma. --Bob

Just an anecdote, bob-tel, but how much more are you willing to pay for something before you question how much the government is using to achieve YOUR goals, and how much they're using to achieve THEIRS?

I DO mind paying more taxes to the government. Because they WASTE it. How's your high speed rail project going?

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

I moved to California a little more than 40 years ago. Back then, during the summer, there were plenty of days when my eyes were burning simply from exposure to all of the crap that used to be in our air. That doesn't happen any more. I'll cheerfully pay the extra buck and a half a gallon to avoid the air pollution of Shanghai and Mexico City. Particularly since my son and his mother both have asthma. --Bob

No one's dying of smog here, either, bob-tel.

You don't live in a city hemmed in by mountains. There's a reason the Clean Air Act gives California the authority to set its own rules. --Bob

_________________"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

No. If you remember my first Jeopardy! interview, you'll know that I'm not particularly materialistic, and I'm certainly not one to envy what others have. What I want is a government that would rather spend $5 billion on child care than on a useless wall.

I don't mind paying more taxes to achieve my goals for the government. But I mind a lot paying more taxes in order to cut the taxes of billionaires. --Bob

Just an anecdote, bob-tel, but how much more are you willing to pay for something before you question how much the government is using to achieve YOUR goals, and how much they're using to achieve THEIRS?

I DO mind paying more taxes to the government. Because they WASTE it. How's your high speed rail project going?

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

I moved to California a little more than 40 years ago. Back then, during the summer, there were plenty of days when my eyes were burning simply from exposure to all of the crap that used to be in our air. That doesn't happen any more. I'll cheerfully pay the extra buck and a half a gallon to avoid the air pollution of Shanghai and Mexico City. Particularly since my son and his mother both have asthma. --Bob

Just curious, how much do you drive in a year? I am guessing gas is not a major part of your budget. Obviously, you have no concern for poor and middle class people, especially in rural areas, who drive a lot, and for whom gas is a major expense.

For example, those service workers who can't afford to live in the Silicon Valley and who might have to drive an hour or more just to get to work.

Just an anecdote, bob-tel, but how much more are you willing to pay for something before you question how much the government is using to achieve YOUR goals, and how much they're using to achieve THEIRS?

I DO mind paying more taxes to the government. Because they WASTE it. How's your high speed rail project going?

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

I moved to California a little more than 40 years ago. Back then, during the summer, there were plenty of days when my eyes were burning simply from exposure to all of the crap that used to be in our air. That doesn't happen any more. I'll cheerfully pay the extra buck and a half a gallon to avoid the air pollution of Shanghai and Mexico City. Particularly since my son and his mother both have asthma. --Bob

Just curious, how much do you drive in a year? I am guessing gas is not a major part of your budget. Obviously, you have no concern for poor and middle class people, especially in rural areas, who drive a lot, and for whom gas is a major expense.

For example, those service workers who can't afford to live in the Silicon Valley and who might have to drive an hour or more just to get to work.

Don't worry about them. They'll all be getting free health care now. I'm fine with that, actually, as long as the state funds it. Let them provide free health care for everybody. Let CA and NYC experiment with it, as long as they do it with their own funds and don't use federal taxpayer money to do it. That's how it should be. If their experiment works, then other states might try it. But I doubt it will work. Di Blasio says he will can do it for $100,000,000.00 a year. Right. Let's see how long that works out. I wonder how Newsome is going to pay for it. But who cares? Heck, if I get sick, I can go move in with bob-tel (open borders) and get health care for free!

Just an anecdote, bob-tel, but how much more are you willing to pay for something before you question how much the government is using to achieve YOUR goals, and how much they're using to achieve THEIRS?

I DO mind paying more taxes to the government. Because they WASTE it. How's your high speed rail project going?

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

I moved to California a little more than 40 years ago. Back then, during the summer, there were plenty of days when my eyes were burning simply from exposure to all of the crap that used to be in our air. That doesn't happen any more. I'll cheerfully pay the extra buck and a half a gallon to avoid the air pollution of Shanghai and Mexico City. Particularly since my son and his mother both have asthma. --Bob

Just curious, how much do you drive in a year? I am guessing gas is not a major part of your budget. Obviously, you have no concern for poor and middle class people, especially in rural areas, who drive a lot, and for whom gas is a major expense.

For example, those service workers who can't afford to live in the Silicon Valley and who might have to drive an hour or more just to get to work.

I drive about 12,000 miles a year. But I breathe every day.

You've never lived here, right? When I first got here, we were well on our way to air of the quality that Mexico City and Beijing currently "enjoy." Pasadena is about five miles south of the San Gabriel Mountains and when the air was bad I literally couldn't see them. When you can see them, they loom over the city quite impressively. --Bob

_________________"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

Gas is more expensive in California because we use a different formula than the rest of the country uses, not because our gas taxes are higher. Refineries outside California don't prepare gasoline that complies with our requirements so supplies are limited.

I moved to California a little more than 40 years ago. Back then, during the summer, there were plenty of days when my eyes were burning simply from exposure to all of the crap that used to be in our air. That doesn't happen any more. I'll cheerfully pay the extra buck and a half a gallon to avoid the air pollution of Shanghai and Mexico City. Particularly since my son and his mother both have asthma. --Bob

Just curious, how much do you drive in a year? I am guessing gas is not a major part of your budget. Obviously, you have no concern for poor and middle class people, especially in rural areas, who drive a lot, and for whom gas is a major expense.

For example, those service workers who can't afford to live in the Silicon Valley and who might have to drive an hour or more just to get to work.

I drive about 12,000 miles a year. But I breathe every day.

You've never lived here, right? When I first got here, we were well on our way to air of the quality that Mexico City and Beijing currently "enjoy." Pasadena is about five miles south of the San Gabriel Mountains and when the air was bad I literally couldn't see them. When you can see them, they loom over the city quite impressively. --Bob